If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

The fight that may make me switch...

The pipeline says, "SONY will ONLY make the SLT-a99 as their FF-upgrade camera." There will be no more DSLR-style camera to come from their ranks. The last straw has been pulled and in a nutshell, they have given the DSLR business back to Canon and Nikon.

To be quite honest about the marketing, incredibly, the new Nikon D800 and D800e are:
.

"SONY inside!"
Why fight, when you can successfully switch?

.
.
Through corporate collusion, THESE cameras are the SONY a9xx-upgrade DSLRs.

If SONY actually went ahead with the a9xx... they would competing head-to-head with their own design. Stabilization is not as critical as it once was, with the higher ISO now in place. What had been the SONY-advantage is becoming irrelevant and does not even apply in the SLT-design. They are simply abandoning it to the other two companies and in-the-lens designs. As such, they are abandoning the Minolta-design, along with it. The great experiment ended quite differently and non-traditionally, that is for sure:

Nikon became the default (manipulated) successor to the "Mind of Minolta" crown?

SAY WHAT?

In the Nikon D800, like the new SLT-a99, they both use the new SONY 36MP sensor. In the Nikon body, of course there is still the "change over" to the Nikon-menu system, but considering how bizarre, complicated and effectively unusable the new SLT-a77 and NEX-7 menus are tending to be... that may just be a blessing in disguise - the lesser of two evils.

Unfortunately, those of us who are all currently stuck with our investments in SONY-mount glass and SONY proprietary hot-shoe flashes, have a migration to this new 36MP DSLR that will be little tough to make. I am sure the new, up-and-coming migration flock to the DSLT-a99 bunch will still be in need of higher-end glass, so sales of SONY/Minolta-mount glass should be swift, if a person prices his/her glass correctly. Of course, you could always sport both systems... which brings its own mixed blessings.

Remember to twist the lens in the reverse direction, As you face the camera mount, SONY mounts turn to the right to lock, Nikon turns the "other way." More than a few lenses have been dropped or damaged due to this little annoyance.

The shutter has been pulled, my friends, and the future fully-exposed. If you want to keep your OVF camera... SONY just sunk her flagship!

The Dark Side (~30% less light to the sensor) has won the day in the SLT-a99. Is low-light imaging all but impossible? I say, there is another way. Does Nikon become the low-light, real-image life-raft? Methinks OVF makes for strange bed-fellows.. and I fear that I do not see another ship in sight. 'Tis a dark day, indeed.

What birthday present this is... The ceremonial end of school... and the unceremonious end of Minolta (SONY), as I knew it.

@Rooz: As soon as you stop laughing your tail off: Sorry, Mate... move over a seat, will ya? And hand me an oar.

Last edited by DonSchap; 03-11-2012 at 12:20 PM.

Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography A Photographer Is ForeverLook, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.flickr® & Sdi

Canon's mk3 on the surface of things looks better to me personally. I think the d800 is going to be too noisy and I'm not too thrilled about 36mp. And as im sure you already know, Sony having been manufacturing nikon sensors for some time now. Just cos a body has the sensor in it doesnt mean it will perform the same way...as has previously been evidenced.

Not sure why you're thinking of switching all of a sudden. The case is no more or less compelling now as it was 3 years ago.

Anti-shake was still at issue... plus the overall cost to make the switch from the SONY a850 was not as important, since it was warrantied and still in production. SONY has since cut off manufacturing of the a900/a850... with no upgrade <- THAT is the "all of the sudden" part of the issue). The overall equation has changed, entirely. There's no future. They sank it.

Since imaging is so much more competitive... and the need for "Professional Services" that much more important. If SONY is not going to be a professional player... it just weighs a lot differently than when I was in school and had a "devil-may-care" or "care-free" existence. I have to imagine a future response level that SONY still refuses to support, seven years later. Amateurs! It would be nice to get some adult leadership in there, instead of this "secret society" they have going. You can see the results of that kind of method currently being used in this country. Cripes, we're almost at war, again! Enough, I say!

OVF is critical to my photography... and if I have to leave to keep it... I know where the door is.

I was happy (not content) with what I could do with the a850. For the most part, it gave me all but the low-light shooting. With the Nikon D800, I may still be able to keep the drive alive. It's not perfect... but, its definitely not the a99, either! When the shutter opens, the LIGHT goes DIRECTLY TO the SENSOR, where it belongs and NOT losing ~30% of it to the darn focusing system, just to have those silly movie features (which I do not use!)

I don't know why I can not make this clear enough? SONY has ripped the heart out of the Full Frame SLR system. To do that, YOU MUST replace it with something that is, at the very least, 100% or you have failed in the mission. 70% is terrible price to play with an "almost" real-time visual sighting system. Had they made the a9xx... they would have kept my business. Without OVF... I am history.

Rooz... sight through the a99... but, do it with the camera OFF. Go ahead... I dare ya! See what you can see... through the lens. It's just not possible. The camera is effectively blind... there is no visual "coast mode"... those batteries are getting chewed up as fast as any other time, depending on what mode you are in.

That's not the case with OVF sighting. Waiting long periods of time for a shot, CAMERA OFF... looking through the glass... works 100% of the time. Subject sighted, Power on (w/ effectively zero-warm up time - media cycle w/ dust shake), focus acquired... shot taken... mission doth ended.

Same thing kind of goes with studio shooting. You can do your set ups with the OVF camera OFF. Advanced technology has its inherent power demands and they will NOT be denied. That can be a real "career move" in some circles. "You forgot to recharge WHAT?"

Last edited by DonSchap; 03-11-2012 at 07:15 PM.

Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography A Photographer Is ForeverLook, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.flickr® & Sdi

Like Rooz said, there's nothing here that many people here haven't told you for years. If you're going to switch, there are several good full-frame alternatives (not that full-frame is a necessity). Heck @TheWengler is creating terrific images with a Canon 5D and a lot fewer lenses than you own...(think about that).
So, to quote from one of my all-time favorite movies, The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly: "If you're going to shoot, shoot, don't talk".
If you're going to switch, switch, don't just talk about it. You've been doing that for years now...

The D800

The power was in the threat to switch... not actually doing it. Switching means you have given up all hope... and, now, adopt a whole new paradigm of issues. Believe me, Nikon is not the "be all-end" all solution I was looking for. In fact, it still lacks many of the true advancement features that would separate the amateurs from the professionals, as far as I am concerned.

Most photographers that I have met, over the past year, are not technophiles. In fact, their claim to fame is production of art, not how a camera fires off a flash. They expect that to work. Personally, I look at the current hot-shoe methodology as extremely old-fashioned and prefer the camera companies collectively get together and make a stab at a unified-method of triggering and control for flash systems. Hazard I say: a STANDARD? Eliminate these numerous third party methods and get it all down to an agreed upon way to make use of Radio Frequency (RF) ignite the Tungsten, so to speak.

Minolta abandoned the ISO-hot shoe... which led to a lot of people fleeing the brand. That was not good and probably began the path to bankruptcy. Not every new idea is a true boon. I am not subscribing to a new idea, here, though. I am asking the three major brands to get together and add RF-triggering and ratio-control to their camera bodies. Yes, keep the hot shoe for a decade, but get started with true menu-control, in-the-camera-body, of the many digital RF receivers that are out there and the new ones to come.

With SONY incestuously providing the sensor to the Nikon... the connection for collaboration already exists! It is only the continual rape of the customer that prohibits the production of a unified RF-solution. By not having a joint solution, each manufacture can strip the coin out of the customers and never provide them with what they really and truly need... standardization for the advancement of the art.

As far as the migration from SONY to Nikon goes... I cannot do it, immediately. Hell, I was not planning on doing it at all, until SONY decided to end the DSLR, as we know it. I just wanted to make my case, clear, for those who might be following my exploits in the digital world. You know who you are... and I thank you for your respective time and occasional participation. I see this episode as a true MESS. Enthusiasm can occasionally become that, as I really did not have a traditional business target out there. As I finish school, my focus has been keenly redirected, through experiencing what other folks have had to endure... and I can see where SONY is not going to go, now. They had their chance, but they choose something I no longer see as an attractive business method or model. So, I have to lift the collapse of my current business model, based on SONY releasing a new OVF-model (a true a900-upgrade), pull out the good parts, and rebuild it. Like I said, I am not thrilled about the Nikon D800 solution... but, I am even less thrilled by the Canon 5DMkIII, over-priced one. There is nothing in the Canon making it worth an additional $1000. $500 might be fair... but, not a grand.

Honestly, j.r. - I do not envision SONY ever running up to my door and saying, "Geez, Don... we screwed up. You had it right on the button, like so many others tried to tell us, but we would not listen to the actual people who use our products. You're not on the payroll. As far as we were concerned, the limited 4% Make.Believe market of 3-D is much more important. Noooo... we hired engineers, people who could give a rat's ass about weddings and other things that the 100% of REAL people are doing, on a daily basis. We're sorry, we did not understand. We're better, now. We're listening. Let's talk. Together... we can build that better DSLR... and, finally, get it right for you and the rest of... our customers."

Yeah, like that would ever happen.

Last edited by DonSchap; 03-11-2012 at 07:01 PM.

Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography A Photographer Is ForeverLook, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.flickr® & Sdi

Talk about rationalization. Sony? Sony has made the sensors for Nikon for a long time. But a Nikon is in no way a Sony, it's a Nikon. A lot of what has been said for a while is coming to roost, how's the Crow tasting?

You said $500 was a reasonable price to pay for the Canon over the Nikon? As luck would have it that's exactly what the difference is. B&H Nikon D800 $2999, Canon 5D III 3499. Would a Sony A1000 be overpriced if it were in the $3500 range?

You remind me of a golfer trying to improve his game...by buying a new set of clubs.

I have to say this is the most interesting forum here...it's entertaining.

Last edited by TenD; 03-11-2012 at 09:17 PM.

A good photograph is knowing where to stand.
Ansel Adams

Rule books are paper, they will not cushion a sudden meeting of stone and metal.
Ernest K. Gann-Fate is the Hunter.

Hold up a second...

Jim...

You misunderstood what I was saying. I was talking about the Canon 5D MkIII vs the Canon 5DMkII. There is no way it is $1000 better than the previous model. Sorry. If anything the D800 and the MkIII should ring in at the same price. Canon is just getting too greedy with its pricing. You guys who paying this are just jumping the gun.

As far as eating crow... betrayal is not something you plan for, last time I checked. There should exist a level of trust between the manufacturer and the customers. I know the old saying of "buyer beware," but at this level of worldwide trade... that seems almost ludicrous.

Last edited by DonSchap; 03-11-2012 at 10:18 PM.

Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography A Photographer Is ForeverLook, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.flickr® & Sdi

betrayal is not something you plan for, last time I checked. There should exist a level of trust between the manufacturer and the customers. I know the old saying of "buyer beware," but at this level of worldwide trade... that seems almost ludicrous.

Betrayal ? lol a little strong don't you think ?

I would suggest "misunderstanding" is a better way to describe it. You have misunderstood sonys intent from the beginning. They were never intending to be a bigger and better Minolta which is I think what you wanted them to be. They just wanted to be who they are which is a major electronics manufacturer.

Unfortunately minolta is gone. And I think pentax and to a lesser degree olympus and will be next. It's a real shame really. These are photographic companies that couldn't, can't or don't want to get it together.